Of the three names being speculated on for VP

One is totally unacceptable. Sam Nunn is a bigot. People who fire people for an immutable characteristic having not one whit to do with performance are bigots. Sam Nunn did that and then forced Clinton to back down when he tried to stop the military from firing people for immutable characteristics having nothing to do with their service.

One is marginally acceptable. Tim Kaine is dead wrong on stem cells. Stem cell research is the Demcoratic version of partial birth abortion (at least politically). Stem cell research revs up our base and divides the pro life community. Just like partial birth abortion revs up their base and divides the pro choice community. As such, stem cell research is one of our most powerful issues. Kaine takes that issue away. He isn't a bigot but his gay rights record is hardly wonderful. He is marginally acceptable.

One is acceptable. Evan Byah is decent. His gay rights record is pretty good. He was wrong on the war which blunts an Obama strength. He wins in a state we often don't. He might help in neighboring Ohio and Michigan.

None of these are great choices but only one is just downright awful.

and the fact that caves to the Republicans in the Senate every chance he gets. Not to mention he is very boring

Bayh is just as bad as Nunn.

Being a woman is also a characteristic that can't be helped.

not on your list, but on many other short lists...i believe he is the best pick for obama IMHO.

I'd love to see Biden as VP.

War voter.
Bankrupcy Bill.
Finger in the wind politician.

He is exactly what is wrong with the democratic party.

Obama needs to stay away from these inside the beltway, weak minded democrats who are responsible for the mess we are in today with their constant appeasement of bush.

That's the only thing that matters to me. I don't care about voting records, or whether they're too this or that on this or that issue. Winning is everything.

But aside from that, if he was a sure-fire winner for the ticket, then that's a compromise that must be made--after all, a McCain Presidency isn't going to give you any more rights than an Obama Presidency with a Nunn/Kaine/Bayh VP. Everyone has to compromise something, on Obama, on his VP--no one is going to get perfection on every pet issue, because there is no perfect candidate, no perfect President. I am broadly interested in Dems winning, I'm not a single-issue voter.

for some of us, we don't have the luxory. People getting fired from their jobs isn't a pet issue.

You made a point to call Nunn a bigot, which he is, and then proceeded to proclaim two other bigots to be "marginally acceptable" and "acceptable". :banghead:


This may interest (or enlighten) you:

Letter from Evan Bayh:

Dear xxx xxxx :

Thank you for contacting me regarding the Marriage Protection Amendment to the United States Constitution. I appreciate your thoughts and concerns. Having been happily married for more than twenty years, this issue is important to me.

I do not support same sex marriage. I believe marriage should be between one man and one woman. That is currently the law in Indiana and is currently the law nationally. I support the Defense of Marriage Act that prohibits federal recognition of same sex marriage and prevents Indiana from being forced to recognize same sex marriages performed in other states.

If you have been told that a judge has struck down Indiana 's law or our nation's law prohibiting same sex marriage, that is simply not true. These laws may never be invalidated. In fact, Indiana 's law prohibiting same sex marriage was recently upheld by our Court of Appeals.

The Constitution should not be amended unless absolutely necessary and should not be amended to deal with situations that are hypothetical and may not come to pass. In a bipartisan vote on June 7, 2006, the Senate agreed and decided not to consider the Constitutional amendment this year because it is premature. I supported that decision.

In the event that the courts do invalidate our state or national laws prohibiting same sex marriage, then a Constitutional amendment should be considered.

Again, thank you for contacting me. I hope the information I have provided is helpful. My website, http://bayh.senate.gov , can provide additional details about legislation and state projects, and you can also sign up to receive my monthly e-newsletter, The Bayh Bulletin , by clicking on the link at the top of my homepage. I value your input and hope you will continue to keep me informed of the issues important to you.


Office of Senator Evan Bayh
(202) 224-5623
Russell 463
Washington, D.C. 20510

either or both of their grow up some day, sit their parents down at the kitchen table, and tell them they're gay.

Not saying this will happen in the Bayh household, but it happens in any number of households, and it seems to me that in that event, Evan's current position would be put under serious strain.

eom

might be undermined by events hypothetically imposed on his own family.

I was delineating that such conversatons where kids decide to come out to their parents take place in many a kitchen.

Don't be on such a hair trigger on an issue that you can't see when someone is taking your position on it.

you were making the argument that should such an event happen in the Bayh family like their kids coming out as gay that it may cause them to "see the light". My response was not aimed at YOU, but rather at the mindset that it may only become an issue of importance to Bayh should he be directly affected by it, and in the meantime he could care less how many other lives it affects....since they are not of "his immediate family".

This is one of those issues that's just so blindingly obvious. There simply isn't an opposing argument that has any merit whatsoever.

The only reasons people hold positions such as the one Bayh outlines here are bigotry and ignorance.

Since moderate and conservative Democrats are being looked at (unless Kerry is still in the running,) I know I'll find issues I have to hold my nose about.

All are acceptable to me so far except for Nunn and Hagel. Chet Edwards is marginally acceptable. I'd be happier about Clinton or Clark compared with Biden, Kaine, and Bayh. But whatever can win, as long as it doesn't go too far.

Does anyone have a reason not to? I'm all ears. Seriously.

but you could be right - who knows until they announce it.

But does it matter anymore? It's not like I'm listened to by the party in any matter anyway. This is a top down party now.

He would destroy Obama's message of having better judgment than the republicans.

He seems like to me like an antiquated sourpuss. And don't get me started on individual issues.

If Obama chooses Nunn, I'll support the Obama part of that ticket.

Kaine? He would likely support Obama's positions, period, including stem cells, if he is part of an administration whose central figure wished for public funding of such research. My guess is that outside of Virginia proper, Kaine is a lot more liberal than inside the state borders.

Ditto Evan Bayh.

That said, I think Kathleen Sebelius is a finalist, and Joe Biden, and on my own personal wish list, Brian Schweitzer.

You heard it here first...

Brittney as head of the Child Welfare division...

If Obama chooses Kaine, VA will be stuck with Republican right wing whackjob fundie Lt. Governor Bolling. Kaine isn't much, but he's vastly preferable to that.

Let Obama choose a VP in a way that doesn't screw a whole state!

I haven't heard Nunn being bandied about seriously. I sure hope he's not.

you would be spot on. Unfortunately they are not the only issue and Bayh is dead wrong on issues a lot more germain to the general public than gay rights.

Biden is being mentioned more than Nunn. Chris Dodd a bit also.

both of those would be VERY acceptable.

and you also left out Bayh's record on abortion rights.

An undivided house has a better chance at winning this election.